http://www.jewishworldreview.com --
THE NEXT SOUND you hear will be conservatives cocking their heads as if
suffering from swimmer's ear. You mean two reporters from the
liberal-leaning Washington Post have written a book vindicating Kenneth
Starr?

They have. Susan Schmidt and Michael Weisskopf (now at Time) offer the
first of what will doubtless be scores of post-Clinton histories. This one
gives Kenneth Starr his due. "Truth at Any Cost" is not a brief for the
much-maligned independent counsel, but it is surprisingly sympathetic, and
about the right things.

This book not only refutes the manifold lies spread by the Clinton forces
about Ken Starr -- it goes further and presents the battle between these two
men in essentially moral terms. Schmidt and Weisskopf might, if you woke
them in the middle of the night, confess that they personally find Starr a
bit self-righteous. But that didn't prevent them from describing the
confrontation between Starr and Clinton as a battle between a man of
rectitude and a reprobate.

Clearly, despite his sterling reputation for honesty and fairness, Starr
was not the ideal choice for independent counsel. The perfect foil for Bill
Clinton would required the combined skills of Jesse Ventura and Will Rogers.

In a contest that required perfect political pitch, Starr often gave the
impression of tone deafness.

Long, long before he had become a Javert in the public mind, he should have
defended himself against the Clinton character-assassination machine. Before
Linda Tripp ever crossed his threshold, during the Whitewater, Filegate and
Travelgate probes, Starr should have responded publicly to misstatements by
the administration.

When the White House claimed to be "cooperating fully" with the
investigation(s), Starr should have held a press conference to announce
(more in sorrow than in anger, surely) that this was hardly the case. He
should then have itemized the subpeonas flouted, documents lost and requests
for information ignored.

When the administration sent its attack dogs to discredit Starr personally,
he should have fought back. If he had, he would have given heart to the
very, very many honest people (even some in Washington, D.C.) who wanted to
defend him -- and the rule of law. Even if Starr had not been what he was --
a completely honorable, utterly straightforward, moderate and learned man; a
man who took very seriously the tradition that a prosecutor speaks only in
court -- the attacks on him by the Clinton spin machine would have been
unconscionable.

Purchasng this book -- linked in 2nd paragraph -- helps fund JWR

For the president or his agents to smear and attempt to discredit a legally
constituted officer of the United States government is disgusting. It would
have been so even if they had told the truth. They didn't. And this caused
great misery for Starr and his family.

For Starr, the investigation of Clinton was never personal. Even in private
discussions within the office, Starr always referred to Clinton as "the
president." (Bill Clinton, you may recall, declined to address former
President Bush by his title.)

If it did nothing else, this book would be worth reading for clarifying the
whole loud, messy business about leaks. You will recall that the president's
lawyers and spinners whined and shrieked about leaks from Ken Starr's office
throughout the eight months of the Lewinsky investigation. These accusations
nearly derailed the investigation more than once. Well, those who suspected
that the leaks really came from the White House or its allies will find
confirmation here.

With truly flabbergasting gall, the president's side was capable of leaking
information to the press and then promptly denouncing the Starr people for
it. In their final confrontation, though, before the House Judiciary
Committee, Starr was able to best David Kendall on the subject. The most
sensitive information about the president, he pointed out -- the FBI report
on the semen-stained dress -- never leaked, because no one in
Kendall's defense network knew about it.

Which raises another point. The president's defenders used up a lot of
oxygen claiming that Starr had laid a perjury trap for Clinton. This book
reminds us that he easily could have. He received the results of the DNA
analysis on the dress before Clinton testified. But instead of permitting
Clinton to walk into the grand jury room ignorant of that fact, Starr leaked
it.

Bill Clinton and many of his allies have shamed and mortified this nation.
But the fact that Ken Starr stuck to his principles bouys our spirits
ome -- as does the very welcome publication of "Truth At Any
Cost."